“The Savage Breast” |

“The Savage Breast”

Published by Caroline March 2nd, 2007 in General

It’s a book I’m reading by Tim Ward (you’ll find it on Google). It is subtitled, “One man’s search for the Goddess”. It flows like a conspiracy theory in that it tracks his growing discovery across the more famous historical sites of the world, and pieces together an image in explanation of why we don’t have a reputable Goddess figure in our contemporary Western culture, and how Her historical relationship with men has created this deficite.

I have only managed the first chapter so far, but already it echoes a thought expressed to me recently by a friend, a Gen Xer, married with children. He speaks of the Feminine in the context of his particular walk of faith, as that which holds the key to his personal masculinity. And he, like Tim Ward, is not speaking about getting on better with women, or learning how to be culturally sensitive to them. These men are speaking of how their gender is inextricably linked to, formed by, the counterpoint of the Feminine.
I’m walking in numinous territory here. Ward’s book is not the usual feminist (Sensitive New Age Guy) treatise to re-establish an ousted Goddess-of-legend. He seeks her image as a man and as an historian, and walks a Jungian path. He describes his suffering along the way…
The challenge to me, a die-hard-pinko-feminist: do I have the courage to say in response, “My femininity is inextricably linked to, formed by, the counterpoint of the Masculine”? (remembering that the Feminine as Goddess in all her aspects is only one aspect of me as human woman). And would it be true for me to say so? Do I as a 21st century Gen X pinko-feminist really understand what it is to be feminine? I’ll be thinking about that in the week to come (and probably for the rest of my life). What say you, Avos & Friends?

20 Responses to ““The Savage Breast””

Feed for this Entry Trackback Address

1 ? Mar 3rd, 2007 at 11:16 am

Call me dogmatic - please.

I have to get a few things outta the way before I can focus on the question.

I don’t like this goddess idea, and not because of any sexist ideologies either. It speaks to me also from the spiritual, but not favourable or good. I see her as Diana of the Romans. She is a deception. Far too New Age for my liking…

Now on to the question, as I understand it, of genders being inextricably linked. My viewpoint on this is simple - I like the idea. Most men do

Seriously tho, you’ve lost me. Of course men and woman define each other, it is how it was intended (Genesis 2:18, 21 - 22 & Gene Edwards “The Divine Romance”). Is it so hard to think that we are who we are because of each other? I must be missing your point completely.

I could ask myself if I really understand what is to be masculine & the answer would be “Yes” tho a slightly loaded one. I understand what it means for ME to be masculine and that that definition will grow and change over time just as I do, just as my relationships with others does.

There are no hard & fast, cookie cutter, stuffy old goat formulae to define that which has been since before the creation of time, nor should there be.
2 Tim Ward Mar 3rd, 2007 at 4:00 pm

Hi Caroline et al:

My “Google Alerts” let’s me know about new posts about my book on line - yours really interested me, because the company your work with, Avocado, is very much akin to my own business (media training for internatial organizations).

I was really struck by your questions: “The challenge to me, a die-hard-pinko-feminist: do I have the courage to say in response, “My femininity is inextricably linked to, formed by, the counterpoint of the Masculine”?

While the previous commentator did not find this significant, I get why to you this is right at the heart of feminism: For millennia, women have been defined by the male, and feminism is all about defining one’s self as a woman not bound by the masucline definition. So now, if men are admiting the feminine defines for them the masculine - this throws the question back on women afresh - how can you both be independent and yet see the male as your counterpoint that in many ways defines you?

I hope my book will continue to provoke these sorts of questions - for me an an author, that’s the point - to inspire thought and discussion.

You will probably find the chapter on Athena stimulating from a work point of view, because much of it is about my own business relationship with a woman who began as a part time consultant and is now co-owner of my company (currently president). I describe what it was like for me to realize I could not hear her ideas, dismissed her persepcttive unconsciously. I talk about what unblocked my ears so that I realized how often she saw and heard things that were invisible to me in the classroom, and that the whole course suffered because of my innate sexism. It’s changed the way I work, and view the world.

Please read on!

Tim Ward
3 Caroline Mar 4th, 2007 at 12:36 pm

First, to my dear friend (?): Can I refer you to a fabulous novel, “The Night Jasmine Man” by my friend David Lambkin, who investigates a man’s relationship with a Persophone-figure, and finds out interesting things about himself as a result. I refer you to this work because I want to establish that it is an archetypal notion I’m looking at, knowing that archetypes are totally human in their conception, and thus potentially very personal.

The notion of the Goddess as popularised by New Age propounders is not the Girl I’m trying to visit. I have to ask for your compassion here, and that you understand that I live in what some will call a post-feminist world, having been taught in various fields by front-line feminists in liberal-politics institutions, while at the same time growing up in a Presbytarian context with a patriarchal cosmology with which I have wrestled in all integrity. So, to say, “Of course men and woman define each other” is not so obvious to me. The silo I have been educated into says women have a parallel culture to the currently dominant male culture. I have enough homosexual friends and colleagues to argue that men and women do not define each other, though male and female clearly do on a physical level (it’s the other levels I’m looking to describe).

This is a confusing landscape made up of prejudices, misconceptions, ingnorance (all mine) and the world of archetypes. And again, a completely subjective journey.

On the subject of masculinity, I cornered my husband (poor chap) last night and tried to excavate from his head what it is that he considers to be feminine. He struggled. So I made a list of things that I considered to be masculine about him so that he could have something to bounce off. The result was a description of how women are not like men. We arrived at no definative set of characteristics which could clearly define even his opinion about what femininity constitutes. I have the same gap. Which is why Tim Ward’s book interests me.

“Feminine” seems to have a perjoritive “soft” quality to it linguistically which neither relates to my self image, nor the Goddess unfolding in Tim’s book. And I recognise this discordance in my husband’s confusion in trying to apply our society’s notion of Feminine with the reality of the woman he is married to. And yet, as a man, he responds to my femininity on a visceral level, which, on the same level, we both depend on for the continuity if our romance-dance. And the age-old problem: this man of mine does not have enough synapses linking the visceral with the articulate parts of his brain… (Wields a mean 15 pound hammer, though - ooh, so masculine!)

Tim, so great to have you come to this party! Look us up if ever you come to sunny South Africa. There are things I’ll want to ask you about, if you don’t mind. Your book is raising some difficult questions. Will keep you posted.
4 ? Mar 5th, 2007 at 10:19 am

I started writing out this really long dissertation and realised I would only be confusing an issue that is actually crystal clear.

How is it that I see that men and women define each other? It’s simple -

Men and women are contemporaries and equals.

We don’t always see it, but it is how it is. We compliment and confound each other in ways that go beyond the scope of any words I can string together to convince you of this. I won’t even try. Consider the weight of the statement above and the repercussions it’ll have not only in your own life but on a universal level.

—–
Amazon Results for The Night Jasmine Man. I’ll pick up a copy as soon as… Thanks.

http://www.amazon.com/Night-Jasmine-Man-David-Lambkin
5 yojules Mar 5th, 2007 at 11:01 am

Once again, you intellectuals are far outstripping me in syllables and sheer brain power - I have read the blog and every comment 3 times at least to try catch up!

I can only agree with (?) in this one, and maybe add my own 5c worth:

Masculinity and feminity are, in my opinion, on a continuum, and not mutually exclusive. I find myself not completely static on that contiuum - the ebb and flow of my own (feminine?)hormones move me back and forth along that line. The environment, and my own inner state also seems to influence where I sit on the continuum on any given day, or moment.

And then there is the delightful chemical dance when 2 people connect from different places on the continuum - even in the joining of the two, the shift happens again. The Yin and Yang are in a perpetual watery dance of energy
6 Caroline Mar 5th, 2007 at 11:26 am

(?) Please do try to convince me - it is exactly that kind of wordy collateral I am asking for. Of course on some level I agree with you, I’m trying to uncover WHY I agree with you. Help me, don’t hinder me. Take my hand and lead me there - it’s so much nicer to walk with someone.

Jules, this certainly is a common experience, probably in all of us (thanks Alan Pease). The very clever chap in my ear says on that continuum where we mostly bunch up on the bell-curve, it is the nature of the polarities with which we (I) are concerned. Those poles define what the apex of the curve teaches us - that at 0 on the continuum we have a synthesis of the poles’ characteristics, not an absence of their characteristics. What are those polar characteristics? Knowing you as I do, I know you have experienced extremes towards both poles, and that you habitually measure out exact quantities of masculinity and femininity to achieve your objectives of the moment. How do you do that?
7 ? Mar 5th, 2007 at 12:55 pm

Ah Jules, but you are an intellectual. The base male in me will clobber anyone who says different (including your lovely self).

I’d love to say that I’ve been able to experience both ends of the spectrum but I can’t in all honesty say that I have. I have experienced moments where I might just be able to catch a glimpse of what it’s like to be a woman but I can’t with any truth say I KNOW. It’s beautiful that I don’t know - I’d miss the joy of the mystery (”the delightful chemical dance”).

I think we have a nasty habit of assigning gender roles to emotions and reactions. There is far too much emphasis placed on how one is expected to react to a given situation - I’m sure you’ve both heard the “That’s not very ladylike” line a few times, just as I’ve heard the “Boy’s don’t cry line” more times than I care to remember. It’s an injurious practice that’s been pushed down on us from centuries of men wanting the upper hand (yes, men are that insecure) - perpetuated by the Catholic Church & “backed up” by some twisted twits manipulated interpretaion of scripture. It became part of the social dynamic & before we could open our eyes some schmuck turned out the light.

I digress… Men and women today behave as they have been programmed to behave & most of them just accept it. I’ve had enough it, it sucks. I’m calling for a hiatus on the social niceties that got us here in the first place. I’m calliing for anarchy in social constructs. Not in a literal way - see beyond the junk you’ve been fed as to how you should behave.

I blame etiquette, beware the stuffy old goat.
8 Caroline Mar 5th, 2007 at 2:08 pm

“Beware the stuffy old goat.” Indeed!

So I continue to peruse Tim’s “The Savage Breast” and (as you suggested, Tim) I found the chapter on Athena very enlightening in view of the Modern Woman phenomenon. I confess I am Athenian at times, less so as I age gracefully (BTW - thanks for the really sexy goddess pic, Jules)

But most powerfully I have enjoyed his exploration of Hekate, queen of the witches. Clarissa Pinkola-Estes, in her book “Women who run with the wolves” give wonderful inroads into this crone-goddess, that she is the goddess of transitions.

And more news: I have foraged from the lovely men around me the beginnings of a list of feminine descriptors. PLEASE remember we are describing the Feminine here, not the female, nor the woman. So, the list: round, soft (as in yielding with wisdom), the back-to -the-wall fighter, the protector, consumer of men’s power, breast, bum, the propensity to not articulate concepts in their entirety.

Responses? additions?
9 ? Mar 5th, 2007 at 2:23 pm

Additions:
equal, friend, companion, lover, strength, grace, power. I may add more later.

Words like “strength” and “power” would be argued by some as more masculine. I disagree.

“the propensity to not articulate concepts in their entirety” - that sounds a helluvalot like me.

Although I’ve added to the list I still think you’re chasing a forumla. I say there is no formula.
10 Caroline Mar 5th, 2007 at 2:50 pm

To be a dictatorial moderator, may I recompile this list with words I personally consider exclusively Feminine?

I’ll just go ahead…

round, soft (as in yielding with wisdom), the back-to -the-wall fighter, the protector, consumer of men’s power, breast, bum, lover (needs a qualifier), strength (qualifier needed), grace, power…

An interesting thing my husband said on that famous occasion, is that masculine power is “power over”, but couldn’t describe what feminine power was, although he strongly asserted that there is feminine power. I asked whether it was “empower” or “power with”, but he said, no. Any ideas?

“I say there is no formula.” Thanks for contributing anyway - very gracious. Please carry on.
11 ? Mar 5th, 2007 at 3:15 pm

I think I need a qualifier for “consumer of mens power”. That almost sounds aggressive, war-like. Is that intentional?

My qualifiers for lover & strength -

Lover - giver and receiver of love as well as partner in lovemaking.
Strength - strength of character. Not dissimilar to the back-to-the-wall fighter concept.

“Thanks for contributing anyway - very gracious.” Ah…
12 Caroline Mar 5th, 2007 at 3:29 pm

‘consumer of mens power’ In Tim’s book he describes in graphic detail the principal at work in his relationship with his significant other. But I have seen it more abstractly explained in kabbala, where the force of God is channeled through the male principal as power which is directed towards the female (womb) principal from which this Godforce is differentiated towards manifestation in Creation. The essence of the male is totally emptied out (nothing is held back) into the female receptiveness. What is “birthed”/issued from there onwards is of Her experience and calibration alone. I don’t intend to imply something war-like, but certainly a ravenous, savage (Berzerker) hunger.
13 ? Mar 5th, 2007 at 3:53 pm

There is more power in man that that which you have described/extracted from the kabbala. Within men and women is the power of God Himself. I’m not elevating man or woman to a state of godhood (just yet) and I think it’s flawed to consider it as a one-sided consumption.

Am I arguing with the precepts of the kabbala? Damn straight!

Not war-like but ravenous, savage, hunger. Adding those to the list? I hope so. These same words could just as easily fit the masculine. If they fit both sexes what do we have then? Do they cancel each other out? Grow in strength? Speak of similarity? And if they speak of similarity does that argue more towards a humanity rather than a feminine/masculine? All of the above? None?!

Hmm… a humanity versus masculine/feminine. Another topic.

A question - what are you going to do once you discover what this means to you?
14 Caroline Mar 5th, 2007 at 4:52 pm

Now we’re talking!

Driving home just now, I was reminded of watching Scottish dancing competitions as a child. The Highland dancing comes across now as something of Athena, about precision and conceptualisation. The washerwoman Irish dances frightened and amazed me with their loud shoes and aggressive advances, and yet they were so much more fascinating, and feminine in their ferocity. And then with my own brief flirtation with belly-dancing (yes it was before it became fashionable…) I loved the focus in the hips and shoulders, felt very feminine and powerful.

(?) Your question: both the process of discovery and the answers will teach me something. As to what I will do? I will ask another question, and another…
15 ? Mar 6th, 2007 at 10:36 am

Keep us posted then. And please - don’t stop blogging.
16 Caroline Mar 6th, 2007 at 9:11 pm

And we move on to the chapter on Mary the mother of Jesus. Tim, would love to have a cup of tea with you over this. Thank heavens I find a consenting voice - I struggled to read Jung on the subject of the anima (it was as though the words on the page just didn’t want to go into my eyes). The anima he describes is so far from my experience of women that I shuddered to think that this common notion of Woman in the psyche of most of Western mankind is projected onto me! Horrible! And Tim’s stroll around the feet of Mary seems to play out my thoughts.

In the book “Crossing the Threshold of Hope” I was deeply touched by Pope John Paul’s chapter on the Marian tradition. Although as a traditionally Protestant thinker I was not convinced by the factual truth of the approach, I was moved by his sincerity, devotion and identification with Mary. At the other end of the scale is Graham Phillip’s “Marian Conspiracy” where he describes a new twist in the Masonic tale where the history of Mary is colonised into Arthurian legend. (A personal note: I have no problem with boys-only or girls-only clubs. But an organisation whose alleged mandate is to issue in a new world order while excluding women from their council & membership is not only deluded, but irrelevant. If anyone can educate me to the contrary, please do).

With these two perspectives, and my revulsion of the anima as described by Jung, I can only lament with Tim as he describes the chivalrous attitude to Mary her legend has created in society at large. And although she has never consciously been my personal goddess, I can track some damage to my early self-perceptions, and early relationships, from her image rising in place of a healthy animus in my own psyche. This has to be a conversation in progress, though, as I humbly wait to listen to the instruction of my catholic friends on the subject - some of whom seem to have a very well-rounded view in femininity. Talk to me…
17 Caroline Mar 10th, 2007 at 9:53 am

The “Savage Breast” goes on to challenge me. Tim has moved on to prehistoric places, Slavic, along the Danube, to find the birth place of the Greek and pre-Greek -type subverted goddesses. I am amazed at his responses to theses artifacts. I have studied them, from an artistic point of view, albeit briefly, and I have always found them impenetrable, inaccessible. And probably not because of their stylised form (thank you Henry Moore) but because I assume that I cannot understand the context or intentions of people living so far removed from me in time. Either Tim is really gaining access to these spirit-forms, or he is just really good at hyperbolic writing. But then, when he (inevitably) takes his learning home, his experiences seem to have taken him places within himself that his partner is capable of following. (now, there’s a woman I’d like to have tea with…).

But I’m a bit at sea here. Tim describes an encounter with a masked, bird-formed goddess that strikes terror in his soul. He says that it visits him in his darkest places where it mutely observes the deeply-buried dark things in his soul, the things he seeks the approval of women to appease. The feeling that she might not approve of his dark things sends him into hate. Ai, are we so devastated in our inner worlds that we are fraught with such self-loathing? I dunno. I can certainly relate to that at times, and it makes me think of the contemporary (of the last 1000 years) forms of religious practice which seek to scratch the same itch.

Does the patriarchal father-god of the Western World seem less judgmental of the darkness of men’s souls that He has unseated and replaced Her? And again, when I see that loathing Tim speaks of shut down a negotiation I’m having with my own man, I have to shudder at who I would have to be for that response to be appropriate to my intentions.

Tim ends this latest chapter with an insight - in seeing that judging, masked bird-woman face, he sees a reflection of himself. I’m eager to see where he goes from here - will let you know.
18 Tim Ward Mar 28th, 2007 at 5:03 am

Dear Caroline:

Lucky, lucky the author who finds such a reader, especially one who invites her friends to engage in such a rich dialogue (polylogue?) on the suject of his obession! I’ve so enjoyed the various posts this discussion has engendered…let me respond briefly that in writing this book, my own ideas of gender, what it means to be male, to be female, have been thouroughly shaken. I seen gender now as a continuum. The danger is in defining one’s own gender as “not the other” which you can do in a bi[polar world, but not with shades of grey.

Some of your readers have cringed a bit at the New Agey fringe around the idea of Goddess - but this is just the latest installment of an idea (that the feminine is sacred and connected to the mystical, greater Being that contains us all) that goes back to prehistory. How odd that in the past 2,000 years we have forgotten it, and are only now rediscovering what was once such a powerful force.

As to that cup of tea in S.A. - the good folks at Oddyessy Magazine have invited me to participate in a conference in South Africa in July. I’m not sure yet if I can make it. I’ll let you know. Teresa will come too (You can write me direct at timwardsbooks@aol.com)

Cheers,

Tim Ward
19 Caroline Apr 11th, 2007 at 8:04 pm

Tim - we would LOVE to see you here!

Finished the book and made it prescribed reading instantly for my husband and all male friends (a statement like that may prove the pudding of who will stand in that fire…). Moving on from mixed metaphors…

An interesting connection I found recently in some 60’s psychedelic writing - there is a correlation between feminine society structure and bovines in the trance inducing mushrooms that grow in the dung of some ancient domesticated cattle. Some cross-field anthropologists have suggested that this initial partnership of man and bovine is the beginning of language, thus abstract reality, thus pre-patriarchal civilisation. Brought to mind the recurring image Tim shows of goddesses partnered with consort bulls in prehistoric sacred sites.
20 Tim Ward Apr 11th, 2008 at 10:29 pm

Hi Caroline:

There is a good chance Teresa and I will be coming to South Africa in June. Please send me a note if this link is still active.

cheers,

Tim Ward (Savage Breast author)

You must log in to post a comment.

Purpose

Building and delivering training solutions that empower people with skills and insight to make better choices and live bigger lives. Being brave enough to take on the challenges at a scale that makes a significant impact in SA and beyond